This virtual community, your very real voice
The last couple of weeks, I’ve noticed a distinct drop-off in the quality and civility of In Box comments.
This isn’t localized to one political leaning. I’ve seen fairly liberal folks saying dumb, predictable and hurtful things. And I’ve seen fairly conservative folks doing very much the same.
So let me just remind everyone of basic principles. This blog exists to foster conversation and ideas, not as a place to settle scores, repeat political talking points or grind axes. If that’s what you want– for some inexplicable reason — you have 99% of the political blogosphere at your disposal.
Now before I continue my finger wag, let me acknowledge that in a metaphorical sense we’re all at the end of a long, long political debate. The election is just a little over a week away. Nerves are raw. The stakes are high. This may seem like the last, best chance to get in your last, best digs.
I want to encourage you to resist those temptations and harken to your better angels. (Yes, I’m casting myself here as a better angel…)
So…principle number one: Be original. You guys are never more empowered than when you are thinking original thoughts, framing arguments that you have created yourselves, with research and facts that you have uncovered and dots you have connected.
If you are repeating someone else’s catch-phrases or conspiracy theories — especially without doing a hell of a lot of fact-checking — it’s both unproductive and boring.
Principle number two: Listen. I know it sucks, but sometimes people you disagree with have better ideas than you do. Sometimes they’re just plain right. Or at least they say things that are worth taking on board. So before you fire back, read carefully, think, process. There’s no hurry, right?
Principle number three: Be friendly. Not just civil. Friendly. The other people commenting on this blog are doing the same things you’re doing: raising a family, earning a living, thinking, grappling with a confusing world. They disagree with you? So what? Be friendly.
And if anyone tells you not to be friendly toward other Americans who disagree with you — give them wide berth. Because that’s creepy.
Final principle: Be passionate and let others be passionate. None of the above means we all have to agree, or fold our tents. Heck, no. Democracy is compromise, but it’s also argument. So argue…but only in the way that you argue with people who you know are on the same side in the ultimate sense.
As I’ve said before, after the election we’ll be revisiting the future and the structure of the In Box. Not sure yet where that conversation will go. But for now, let’s wrap up this big election with the kind of discussion that would make us all proud.
This is maybe grandiose, but sometimes I like to imagine someone far outside the North Country stumbling across one of our conversations and thinking, Wow. Those people are really lighting it up. I wish our community was having that kind of discourse.
Tags: election12
Consider me finger wagged! But do we have to stop being snarky too?
“And if anyone tells you not to be friendly toward other Americans who disagree with you — give them wide berth. Because that’s creepy.”
No, that’s just the high school cafeteria. Which is what American politics is.
“..Wow. Those people are really lighting it up…”
yes, but what are some of them smoking?
Brian M: I’ve often criticized you for the frequency of dime-a-dozen analyses of the presidential race in the In Box. You typically pooh-pooh my complaints. Fair enough. It’s your blog. You can do what you want. But this incivility you complain about is a consequence.
As has been oft pointed out, American society is divided. The most obvious manifestation of those divisions is in national politics, which are particularly tribal these days. Local politics are a little bit less tribal, simply because the commentariat for local and regional issues is smaller and more intimate. It’s easier to be nasty toward some faceless politician in Washington that cable TV or yap radio is demonizing than your neighbor. Or at the very least, there are probably fewer voices trying to demonize your neighbor.
You know the quality of national discourse is far poorer than that of regional discourse. You’ve increased the percentage of national ‘analyses’ you write about. Why are you surprised by the natural result?
OK. In keeping with the originality test, I’ll pull one from my list of things-that-should but aren’t-being discussed:
Joined with the “less government” conservative mantra is the notion that decisions should be shifted from the Federal to the State level. The States, we are told, are the place for innovation and for responsiveness to public interest. In this Brave New World, each State will dictate policy on education, civil rights, health care, working conditions, etc. etc. Really???
Consider:
1. We are getting daily revelations on the failure of State regulators to shut down the production of shoddy, dangerous pharmaceuticals in Massachusetts. Yes, for years there were repeated reports of problems; for years repeated violations were ignored. Why? Incompetent staff? Winks and nods between corporate interests and State regulators? A misguided concern about revenue and jobs? Clearly conflicting interests within one State and people all over the country are dying as a result.
2. We are getting daily updates on the massive cash flows across State lines to affect local elections. A PAC from Iowa funded the election of the Kansas Secretary of State. Big donors from Texas and Nevada are funding political races across the country. The notion that the States are building good government through splendid communication with their own citizens is mythical.
3. Bullies don’t take on big groups. The smaller, more isolated the target, the easier the win. A lone employee, lacking the negotiation power of a union, hasn’t got a chance in this game. An ethical regulator, lacking the muscle of a Federal agency, won’t survive. And a State, lacking the unifying strength of federation with other States, is the easiest target of all.
The name of this game is to cut individuals from the protection of the herd — and call them lunch.
Brian (MOFYC) –
I don’t buy the idea that there’s a causal link between the fact that you don’t like my blog posts about national politics (which are among the most read and most discussed features of the In Box) and people holding uncivil discussions.
That said, it is important for you to know that your concerns about me airing out my own interests in national politics on this blog site are being heard and discussed. We’re thinking hard about what the In Box should look like after election day.
Critical feedback like yours is certainly part of the mix.
–Brian, NCPR
I think that Dave makes some good points about “faux outrage”. In a good discussion there should be plenty of room for making statements that are challenging and people in the discussion need to allow room for inelegant turns of phrase, to coin a term. The great thing about the In Box is that there is usually a good free flowing exchange of ideas. And it is fairly fast paced very often – just like a good conversation. There should be plenty of room for people to make submit ideas without word by word critiques which miss the point of the overall idea.
It is worthwhile to point out that a person may have chosen a better word or phrase to convey an idea and allow the commenter to re-phrase in a way that better conveys their thoughts without giving unintended offense. And sometimes it is good to be offended and to explore the underlying themes that cause offense without priggish exchanges.
People need to keep an open mind and be willing to change their mind or modify their positions.
Also, this shouldn’t be a place where people need to write dissertations to convey their ideas. We often use short-hand that may not convey a precise meaning but we can get in endless back and forth on minutia unnecessarily. I’m sure that turns people off who might feel they have something to contribute but don’t want to go through a process like having their Doctoral Thesis challenged. If something is clearly a typo or poor editing, or mis spelling – let it go, people!
I love seeing comments here from new commenters.
one more thing, humor often doesnt translate well in written form, but I am absolutely oppose to the use of emoticons. Deal with it!
two, two more things… I learned from my dog: If you want to be friendly he’ll be friendly, if you want to fight he’ll fight.
And more tangents! I love tangents!
Brian, I am not certain of what you are getting at. I don’t have a problem with someone disagreeing with anything I say or think. I’m reminded of the old phrase, “If you can’t take the heat in the kitchen, get out.”
I’m not suggesting anyone be rude. But forcefully stating your views is not being rude unless you feel the need to resort to “fighting words.”
I hope this blog is not dumb-downed in the name of civility.
Mayflower: what was it Brian said about conspiracy theories and talking points? Same stuff, different day, I guess.
Civility? Not much chance of that, sadly.
Good job sharpening yer stick Larry
I think a good visual is the recent debates. I was amazed at how Obama/Romney and Biden/Ryan appear genuine in their handshakes before – go at it with controlled, visible emotion – and end with another handshake. I think the American people are pretty smart and can spot a phony when they see it. I saw these men as being sincere.
We have lost the propriety our society once knew. Call it old fashioned – but some things are timeless. Culturally, we’ve lowered the bar on self-control and our “anything goes” society leaks out on venues such as this (just take a look at Facebook). People tend to write what they wouldn’t necessarily say face to face.
So, my 2 cents is this:
1) Before posting, think of shaking the hand of the one you may be replying to.
2) Be passionate, but refrain from name calling. Not because a person can’t man (or woman) up and take it. But because it is just the right thing to do.
(KHL … your humor translates perfectly. Keep it coming. ; ) << oops
“We are sun and moon, dear friend; we are sea and land. It is not our purpose to become each other; it is to recognize each other, to learn to see each other and honor him for what he is: each the other’s opposite and complement.”
-Herman Hesse
“Get bent.”
-Homer Simpson
Good points, Brian.
I think it may be that we have been in the trenches a little too long for much civility, originality, and friendliness. Not much original left to say. But worth remembering to try.
And this is dialog, not actual warfare, and that is very good.
Personally – I haven’t noticed too much in civility in this blog ( with the election stuff). There is a lot of passion and culture war strong feelings , but people have been pretty restrained. I would take issue with Knuck on the emoticon rejection. In this particular situation where we make strong snarky comments that can be read in different ways I think it’s important to let people know that something is meant to be humerous and said with affection and not personally offensive or said in anger etc. emoticons work well and efficiently for that.
Is there an emoticon for “the finger”.? Probably yes.
I notice an increasing lack of civility across the internet.
But I don’t notice it so much in the actual real world, which is a good thing. In some ways this becomes overblown, I don’t buy that the US is horribly totally divided, I don’t buy that this is a critical election the most critical election in decades maybe EVER! Come on think of the impact of a 72 McGovern victory (rest in peace George). But all of this stuff is meant to keep us agitated, it is no different from product marketing which is meant to keep us perpetually unsatisfied, always needing something some product.
Mayflower yes I see your points. The issue though from your perspective; what if the federal government becomes controlled by very conservative people, do you want them telling NYS what to do? State’s rights cut both ways.
Only backward people use emoticons!
“I don’t buy the idea that there’s a causal link between the fact that you don’t like my blog posts about national politics (which are among the most read and most discussed features of the In Box) and people holding uncivil discussions.”
The causal link isn’t between Brian’s dislike of your blog posts and the uncivil discussions… the causal link is between the content of the blog posts (which Brian just happens to dislike) and the uncivil discussions.
And I think that link is pretty undeniable.
That said, I’ve enjoyed your election posts. I feel that a local voice giving thoughtful opinions and perspective on national issues is a unique and valuable resource.
If I have a complaint about your coverage of national politics right now it isn’t that the heat gets turned up in the comment section, it is that it has taken away from the number of posts you commit to local issues. I feel like there have been some interesting topics recently that could have used a good inspection and analysis. But I understand that you are one guy, with only so much typing time – and presidential elections are only every 4 years, so I think it is an acceptable trade off. But post election, I’ll be happy when the ratio returns to favor local.
And then we can all get surly with each other over the APA.
May I suggest when you start to wag your finger you start by looking in a mirror!
I hope when Brian gets around to writing his inevitable, and necessary, post on the impact of the Sandy on the political situation (which might take a while, since the actual impact of the storm will obviously take a priority…and I’m really glad we have NCPR around for this), he will discuss the fact that neither candidate, Obama or Romney, has (according to several guests from all political sides on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” today ) seen fit to discuss climate change once in the campaign. In spite of the fact that the last 19 months has seen an unprecedented level of storms and droughts battering the nation, at an upward spiraling level of frequency and violence. And the very scientists who predicted this 20 years ago, are saying these are just a foretaste of what is to come. It threatens not only our economy, it threatens our very civilization. And from the candidates, nothing.
Brian M: you’re either misrepresenting or misinterpreting my argument. It’s not uncivil because I dislike the national posts. My dislike is a reaction to the incivility, not a cause. I believe that the topic inherently draws more hardened, inflexible and thus uncivil opinions. I also feel comments on national posts are far less authentic and original because most people just repeat the same empty talking points they’re fed elsewhere on yap radio, yap TV and the blogosphere. It’s not a real dialogue, just people reading (shouting) scripts. This inherently leads to a less civil environment when people aren’t listening to each other. From what I’ve read, discussions on local and regional issues are much more organic. Opinions are hardened on certain issues, but the vitriol is a bit lower simply because the “scripts” aren’t as comprehensive so people actually have to think for themselves and engage others in an authentic manner.
Kathy, I like you too ; )
every year now we seem to have an (october) storm “of the century”
This is the new fall deal. get used to it
Speaking of storms of the century, on the Great Lake in mid November of 1917, there was a three day blow that kicked up 35 waves, sunk about 19 ships, mostly on Lake Huron, and resulted in about 250 deaths.
Speaking of storms, guess who wants to abolish FEMA and let the states manage disasters on their own?http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/28/1151867/-Romney-on-Eliminating-FEMA-Absolutely
I forgot to mention, the above was typed in my friendliest , warmhearted manner.
Thanks Newt, for reminding us that the only thing worse than the ignorant insults often seen on Internet discussions is phony warmth and backslapping, which are more often committed face to face.
:-)
Knuck, I saw a New Yorker cartoon recently where they described an app you can get that will scrub and emoticons from your email or other things. Too bad it isn’t real. I would get one also!
KHL: : P
Brian: How are we doing? : )
Group hug. %)
JDM, lol lol!